If Twilight Princess hit Cube in 2005 would it have pushed GCN sales past Xbox?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by bonesawisready5 (4940 posts) -
This thought crossed my mind the other day as I read an article arguing that the GCN version of Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess was superior to the Wii one. Twilight Princess was originally slated to arrive on GameCube in 2005 before it got ported and delayed for the Wii. Fans at the time wanted a "true" sequel to OOT with a more realistic art direction than Wind Waker so its safe to say a Twilight Princess exclusive release on GameCube in 2005 would have moved a few more $99 systems. How much I don't know. But I would think that if Twilight Princess had come out on GameCube in 2005, just before HD gaming really got started with the Xbox 360's release and before the Wii version it could have pushed a few more million GameCube consoles. We all know the Cube sold about 22 million systems while the original Xbox hit 24 million. Do you think the demand for a "realistic" Zelda could have propelled the Cube to second place that generation and pass the Xbox's lifetime sales? Maybe taking the Cube to 24-26 million? I think there's a chance that it would have helped the Cube at least TIE the Xbox in terms of sales. What are your thoughts? Would it have not done anything for the struggling Cube anyway? It still surprises me that people didn't want to buy a great system with some great exclusives while it was just $99 from 2003 and on. Heck, the Cube bundles were pretty impressive often giving away top games.
#2 Posted by CaptainGamespot (586 posts) -

I always hated that nintendo delayed twilight princess just for the Wii. Ihad it reserved for cube for years.

then, they cancelled the cube version of super paper mario, making it a wii game. 

to answer, yes, probably would have.

#3 Posted by Megavideogamer (5522 posts) -

It would say that it would have not really helped the Gamecube in sales as much. The realistic Legend of Zelda was originally announced to be coming to the Gamecube at the beginning of the systems launch. With the famous tech demo..

But only after the end of the Gamecube lifespan did Twilight Princess come to the Gamecube. after it was move the the Wii.

The cell shaded version of Legend of Zelda wasn't well recieved because of the art style. So that 1 game wouldn't have made much of a difference in the overall sales of the Gamecube. 24.5 million for Xbox versus 21.75 million for the Gamecube.

2.75 million consoles worldwide between the Xbox and Gamecube for a very distance second place. 1 game really would have not made a difference. Realistic legend of Zelda or otherwise.

#4 Posted by Blueresident87 (5340 posts) -

It would have made little different in console sales...many Zelda fans would be Nintendo fans by default and would already have owned the system whether TP was released for it or not.

#5 Posted by Eikichi-Onizuka (8115 posts) -
Most Zelda fans had a Gamecube already so no, might have sold a few thousand consoles but would have made that big a difference.
#6 Posted by Shenmue_Jehuty (5207 posts) -

Seeing how the XBOX and GC global sales were very close, it very well could have tipped the scale in Nintendo's favor.

#7 Posted by bonesawisready5 (4940 posts) -
I would think the audience that wanted that more "mature" Zelda might have also been the audience who thought the Cube was "too kiddy", especially with many consumers writing off Wind Waker unfairly due to art direction. So I would imagine TP on Cube in 2005 could've done something. 2.75 million units like someone else said? I don't know, probably not. 1 million more units? I'd say thats pretty likely. But Twilight Princess had some epic sway with the Wii. It got 3-5 million people to buy the console even though Wii Sports helped that tremendously too. We'll never know. I do wish Nintendo had the Cube go out with more of a bang in 2005/2006 like how the Wii got Skyward Sword, Kirby, Xenoblade, etc.
#8 Posted by Chozofication (3688 posts) -

Probably.

Also, I would only ever play the GCN version.  They mirrored the Wii version and the Wii functionality is tacked on.  It's a gamecube game, not a Wii game.

#9 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

I don't think so.

The only "big" games Cube had at the time were Resident Evil 4 and the "realistic" Zelda, and even RE4 was ported to PS2.

Meanwhile, PS2 & Xbox were still getting excellent 1st and 3rd party games, superior multi-plats and had online play.

GC suffered some heavy losses during that gen.

PS2 had all the major Japanese 3rd party support for themselves and GTA timed exclusivity and Xbox had the US devs and some Japanese devs (Sega & Tecmo) backing it, supplying it with many PC ports and exclusives.

Xbox also "stole" Rare and the hardware crown from them and the shooters. (N64 atleast had the better hardware and shooters in favour of PS1 while GC lost that too)

The only big allie Nintendo had at the time were Capcom, but that alliance didn't last for long as games like Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7 and RE4 were all ported to PS2 eventually.

They also did some over-sights regarding their own games.

They thought making a "cartoon" Zelda would please the fanbase but the only thing that did was split the Zelda fanbase.

Many also complained about Mario Sunshine being a major disappointment.

And there were some "confused" costumers who thought Metroid Prime was "like Halo" and were returning it back to the stores because it wasn't.

Games like Eternal Darkness, MGS: Twin Snakes and FF: Crystal Chronicles also weren't the "system sellers" Nintendo hoped for.

The GTA games and Halo were all the rage at the time and Nintendo had no answer on those.

They thought gamers would still be interested in more traditional (arcade) console games, but futuristic racers and such were largly ignored at the time.

On top of it, the system had a "kiddie" image because it was purple (ignorant thinking, obviously, but what can you do) and criticized for the lack of DVD playback and online play.

So no, I don't think TP comming out sooner would make a major difference in sales.

The GC was a good, but misunderstood, system, that just wasn't as good as the previous Nintendo systems, imo. (altho some may say that N64 already wasn't but I think it was "saved" thanks to it's stellar 1st and 2nd party exclusive line-up)

#10 Posted by Renegade_Fury (17444 posts) -

No, but it might have had a shot if it had come out in 2003 instead of that crappy game. WW was so off putting, I have friends that dropped the entire franchise because of it. If TP had come out in '05, I think it would still have been somewhat overshadowed from the 360's launch.

#11 Posted by bonesawisready5 (4940 posts) -

No, but it might have had a shot if it had come out in 2003 instead of that crappy game. WW was so off putting, I have friends that dropped the entire franchise because of it. If TP had come out in '05, I think it would still have been somewhat overshadowed from the 360's launch.

Renegade_Fury
That sucks they dropped the IP because of the art direction. Its a fantastic game IMO.
#12 Posted by Renegade_Fury (17444 posts) -

[QUOTE="Renegade_Fury"]

No, but it might have had a shot if it had come out in 2003 instead of that crappy game. WW was so off putting, I have friends that dropped the entire franchise because of it. If TP had come out in '05, I think it would still have been somewhat overshadowed from the 360's launch.

bonesawisready5

That sucks they dropped the IP because of the art direction. Its a fantastic game IMO.

I hate WW like them, but for reasons beyond just cosmetics. TP was good enough to bring me back, but for people that aren't hardcore fans, WW proves just how detrimental "kiddy" looks can be.

#13 Posted by bonesawisready5 (4940 posts) -

[QUOTE="bonesawisready5"][QUOTE="Renegade_Fury"]

No, but it might have had a shot if it had come out in 2003 instead of that crappy game. WW was so off putting, I have friends that dropped the entire franchise because of it. If TP had come out in '05, I think it would still have been somewhat overshadowed from the 360's launch.

Renegade_Fury

That sucks they dropped the IP because of the art direction. Its a fantastic game IMO.

I hate WW like them, but for reasons beyond just cosmetics. TP was good enough to bring me back, but for people that aren't hardcore fans, WW proves just how detrimental "kiddy" looks can be.

Well at least you dislike it for more legitimate reasons. I can understand someone not liking an art (st)yle but its never stopped me from playing a game. Even then, I wouldn't find "Oh its kiddy" to be legit. I guess everyone can have their own opinion but it would seem rather insecure and short-sighted to dismiss just because it "looks kiddy". I mean, Up is a film with a distinctly childish art (st)yle but that didn't stop it from having a sadder, more emotional and better love story than pretty much every other non-animated film in the last 10 years (with some exceptions) off-topic: I hope the add those two canned dungeons into Wind Waker HD and make those how you get those pieces of the Tri-Force instead of the fetch quest. Maybe make the fetchquest optional or you could choose to complete that task by beating two extra dungeons.
#14 Posted by mariokart64fan (19636 posts) -

I don't think so.

The only "big" games Cube had at the time were Resident Evil 4 and the "realistic" Zelda, and even RE4 was ported to PS2.

Meanwhile, PS2 & Xbox were still getting excellent 1st and 3rd party games, superior multi-plats and had online play.

GC suffered some heavy losses during that gen.

PS2 had all the major Japanese 3rd party support for themselves and GTA timed exclusivity and Xbox had the US devs and some Japanese devs (Sega & Tecmo) backing it, supplying it with many PC ports and exclusives.

Xbox also "stole" Rare and the hardware crown from them and the shooters. (N64 atleast had the better hardware and shooters in favour of PS1 while GC lost that too)

The only big allie Nintendo had at the time were Capcom, but that alliance didn't last for long as games like Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7 and RE4 were all ported to PS2 eventually.

They also did some over-sights regarding their own games.

They thought making a "cartoon" Zelda would please the fanbase but the only thing that did was split the Zelda fanbase.

Many also complained about Mario Sunshine being a major disappointment.

And there were some "confused" costumers who thought Metroid Prime was "like Halo" and were returning it back to the stores because it wasn't.

Games like Eternal Darkness, MGS: Twin Snakes and FF: Crystal Chronicles also weren't the "system sellers" Nintendo hoped for.

The GTA games and Halo were all the rage at the time and Nintendo had no answer on those.

They thought gamers would still be interested in more traditional (arcade) console games, but futuristic racers and such were largly ignored at the time.

On top of it, the system had a "kiddie" image because it was purple (ignorant thinking, obviously, but what can you do) and criticized for the lack of DVD playback and online play.

So no, I don't think TP comming out sooner would make a major difference in sales.

The GC was a good, but misunderstood, system, that just wasn't as good as the previous Nintendo systems, imo. (altho some may say that N64 already wasn't but I think it was "saved" thanks to it's stellar 1st and 2nd party exclusive line-up)

nameless12345

what losses ,  nintendo made money with gamecube their first loss came last year lol 

and im sure if nintendo kept supporting the gamecube it would have passed the xbox since ms pulled out early , 

#15 Posted by Jag85 (5129 posts) -

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I don't think so.

The only "big" games Cube had at the time were Resident Evil 4 and the "realistic" Zelda, and even RE4 was ported to PS2.

Meanwhile, PS2 & Xbox were still getting excellent 1st and 3rd party games, superior multi-plats and had online play.

GC suffered some heavy losses during that gen.

PS2 had all the major Japanese 3rd party support for themselves and GTA timed exclusivity and Xbox had the US devs and some Japanese devs (Sega & Tecmo) backing it, supplying it with many PC ports and exclusives.

Xbox also "stole" Rare and the hardware crown from them and the shooters. (N64 atleast had the better hardware and shooters in favour of PS1 while GC lost that too)

The only big allie Nintendo had at the time were Capcom, but that alliance didn't last for long as games like Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7 and RE4 were all ported to PS2 eventually.

They also did some over-sights regarding their own games.

They thought making a "cartoon" Zelda would please the fanbase but the only thing that did was split the Zelda fanbase.

Many also complained about Mario Sunshine being a major disappointment.

And there were some "confused" costumers who thought Metroid Prime was "like Halo" and were returning it back to the stores because it wasn't.

Games like Eternal Darkness, MGS: Twin Snakes and FF: Crystal Chronicles also weren't the "system sellers" Nintendo hoped for.

The GTA games and Halo were all the rage at the time and Nintendo had no answer on those.

They thought gamers would still be interested in more traditional (arcade) console games, but futuristic racers and such were largly ignored at the time.

On top of it, the system had a "kiddie" image because it was purple (ignorant thinking, obviously, but what can you do) and criticized for the lack of DVD playback and online play.

So no, I don't think TP comming out sooner would make a major difference in sales.

The GC was a good, but misunderstood, system, that just wasn't as good as the previous Nintendo systems, imo. (altho some may say that N64 already wasn't but I think it was "saved" thanks to it's stellar 1st and 2nd party exclusive line-up)

mariokart64fan

what losses ,  nintendo made money with gamecube their first loss came last year lol 

and im sure if nintendo kept supporting the gamecube it would have passed the xbox since ms pulled out early , 


Exactly. It was Microsoft that suffered the biggest losses that gen. The Xbox was sold at a loss, whereas the GameCube was sold at a profit, despite the GameCube being cheaper yet graphically on par with the Xbox (probably because the GC's PowerPC architecture proved to be more cost-efficient than the Xbox's Pentium III architecture).

As for that loss that Nintendo made last year, it turns out that they've mananged to avert it and turn that into a profit:

Nintendo's Return to Profit Thanks to Currency Changes

In other words, because the US dollar's currency started picking up again a few months ago, this resulted in a 22.2 billion yen (over $250 million) gain for Nintendo from the currency exchange, cancelling out whatever loss they were about to make. So yeah, it looks like Nintendo still hasn't made a loss in over 30 years.

#16 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

[QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I don't think so.

The only "big" games Cube had at the time were Resident Evil 4 and the "realistic" Zelda, and even RE4 was ported to PS2.

Meanwhile, PS2 & Xbox were still getting excellent 1st and 3rd party games, superior multi-plats and had online play.

GC suffered some heavy losses during that gen.

PS2 had all the major Japanese 3rd party support for themselves and GTA timed exclusivity and Xbox had the US devs and some Japanese devs (Sega & Tecmo) backing it, supplying it with many PC ports and exclusives.

Xbox also "stole" Rare and the hardware crown from them and the shooters. (N64 atleast had the better hardware and shooters in favour of PS1 while GC lost that too)

The only big allie Nintendo had at the time were Capcom, but that alliance didn't last for long as games like Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7 and RE4 were all ported to PS2 eventually.

They also did some over-sights regarding their own games.

They thought making a "cartoon" Zelda would please the fanbase but the only thing that did was split the Zelda fanbase.

Many also complained about Mario Sunshine being a major disappointment.

And there were some "confused" costumers who thought Metroid Prime was "like Halo" and were returning it back to the stores because it wasn't.

Games like Eternal Darkness, MGS: Twin Snakes and FF: Crystal Chronicles also weren't the "system sellers" Nintendo hoped for.

The GTA games and Halo were all the rage at the time and Nintendo had no answer on those.

They thought gamers would still be interested in more traditional (arcade) console games, but futuristic racers and such were largly ignored at the time.

On top of it, the system had a "kiddie" image because it was purple (ignorant thinking, obviously, but what can you do) and criticized for the lack of DVD playback and online play.

So no, I don't think TP comming out sooner would make a major difference in sales.

The GC was a good, but misunderstood, system, that just wasn't as good as the previous Nintendo systems, imo. (altho some may say that N64 already wasn't but I think it was "saved" thanks to it's stellar 1st and 2nd party exclusive line-up)

Jag85

what losses ,  nintendo made money with gamecube their first loss came last year lol 

and im sure if nintendo kept supporting the gamecube it would have passed the xbox since ms pulled out early , 


Exactly. It was Microsoft that suffered the biggest losses that gen. The Xbox was sold at a loss, whereas the GameCube was sold at a profit, despite the GameCube being cheaper yet graphically on par with the Xbox (probably because the GC's PowerPC architecture proved to be more cost-efficient than the Xbox's Pentium III architecture).

As for that loss that Nintendo made last year, it turns out that they've mananged to avert it and turn that into a profit:

Nintendo's Return to Profit Thanks to Currency Changes

In other words, because the US dollar's currency started picking up again a few months ago, this resulted in a 22.2 billion yen (over $250 million) gain for Nintendo from the currency exchange, cancelling out whatever loss they were about to make. So yeah, it looks like Nintendo still hasn't made a loss in over 30 years.

 

I ment 3rd party support losses, not financial.

Altho GC didn't sell well either.

It only sold well for a brief period during launch time but soon the sales dropped a lot.

So much, infact, that they had to halt production of the system at some point.

The price drop to 99$ didn't do miracles either and they gladly ditched the system when Wii came out.

I've also heard that GC's poor sales were backed by the great GBA sales.

#17 Posted by Admiral-lemnant (160 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

I don't think so.

The only "big" games Cube had at the time were Resident Evil 4 and the "realistic" Zelda, and even RE4 was ported to PS2.

Meanwhile, PS2 & Xbox were still getting excellent 1st and 3rd party games, superior multi-plats and had online play.

GC suffered some heavy losses during that gen.

PS2 had all the major Japanese 3rd party support for themselves and GTA timed exclusivity and Xbox had the US devs and some Japanese devs (Sega & Tecmo) backing it, supplying it with many PC ports and exclusives.

Xbox also "stole" Rare and the hardware crown from them and the shooters. (N64 atleast had the better hardware and shooters in favour of PS1 while GC lost that too)

The only big allie Nintendo had at the time were Capcom, but that alliance didn't last for long as games like Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7 and RE4 were all ported to PS2 eventually.

They also did some over-sights regarding their own games.

They thought making a "cartoon" Zelda would please the fanbase but the only thing that did was split the Zelda fanbase.

Many also complained about Mario Sunshine being a major disappointment.

And there were some "confused" costumers who thought Metroid Prime was "like Halo" and were returning it back to the stores because it wasn't.

Games like Eternal Darkness, MGS: Twin Snakes and FF: Crystal Chronicles also weren't the "system sellers" Nintendo hoped for.

The GTA games and Halo were all the rage at the time and Nintendo had no answer on those.

They thought gamers would still be interested in more traditional (arcade) console games, but futuristic racers and such were largly ignored at the time.

On top of it, the system had a "kiddie" image because it was purple (ignorant thinking, obviously, but what can you do) and criticized for the lack of DVD playback and online play.

So no, I don't think TP comming out sooner would make a major difference in sales.

The GC was a good, but misunderstood, system, that just wasn't as good as the previous Nintendo systems, imo. (altho some may say that N64 already wasn't but I think it was "saved" thanks to it's stellar 1st and 2nd party exclusive line-up)

nameless12345

what losses ,  nintendo made money with gamecube their first loss came last year lol 

and im sure if nintendo kept supporting the gamecube it would have passed the xbox since ms pulled out early , 


Exactly. It was Microsoft that suffered the biggest losses that gen. The Xbox was sold at a loss, whereas the GameCube was sold at a profit, despite the GameCube being cheaper yet graphically on par with the Xbox (probably because the GC's PowerPC architecture proved to be more cost-efficient than the Xbox's Pentium III architecture).

As for that loss that Nintendo made last year, it turns out that they've mananged to avert it and turn that into a profit:

Nintendo's Return to Profit Thanks to Currency Changes

In other words, because the US dollar's currency started picking up again a few months ago, this resulted in a 22.2 billion yen (over $250 million) gain for Nintendo from the currency exchange, cancelling out whatever loss they were about to make. So yeah, it looks like Nintendo still hasn't made a loss in over 30 years.

 

I ment 3rd party support losses, not financial.

Altho GC didn't sell well either.

It only sold well for a brief period during launch time but soon the sales dropped a lot.

So much, infact, that they had to halt production of the system at some point.

The price drop to 99$ didn't do miracles either and they gladly ditched the system when Wii came out.

I've also heard that GC's poor sales were backed by the great GBA sales.

[/QUOTE

 

Yes the GBA had literally no competition when it first came out and by the time it did it already was well ahead. It pretty much was Nintendos ATM when they needed cash.

 

As for the question no. 25 or so million vs. 21 or so million would require a super killer app. The Gamecubes strongest title in sales was melee which actually took awhile to reach its current sales number of the time which was 7 million by 2008 after coming out in 2001 and selling more than the majority of games released for the gamecube during those years.

 

Wind Waker which came out in 2002-2003 took around 4 years to sell 4 million or so and being one of the few heard of games during the horrible droughts helped with that. By the time TP came out the Gamecube was wanting to be ditches and software sales were terriblly under what nintendo wanted for many games. I highly doubt that TP would have helped the gamecube. The GC version of TP sold a little over 1 million from 2006 to around 2008 which i believe is when the software was discontinued, it took TP longer on the Wii to reach WW numbers on the GC in the same time frame.

 

So the answer is basically no.

#18 Posted by Jag85 (5129 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="mariokart64fan"] what losses ,  nintendo made money with gamecube their first loss came last year lol 

and im sure if nintendo kept supporting the gamecube it would have passed the xbox since ms pulled out early , 

nameless12345


Exactly. It was Microsoft that suffered the biggest losses that gen. The Xbox was sold at a loss, whereas the GameCube was sold at a profit, despite the GameCube being cheaper yet graphically on par with the Xbox (probably because the GC's PowerPC architecture proved to be more cost-efficient than the Xbox's Pentium III architecture).

As for that loss that Nintendo made last year, it turns out that they've mananged to avert it and turn that into a profit:

Nintendo's Return to Profit Thanks to Currency Changes

In other words, because the US dollar's currency started picking up again a few months ago, this resulted in a 22.2 billion yen (over $250 million) gain for Nintendo from the currency exchange, cancelling out whatever loss they were about to make. So yeah, it looks like Nintendo still hasn't made a loss in over 30 years.

 

I ment 3rd party support losses, not financial.

Altho GC didn't sell well either.

It only sold well for a brief period during launch time but soon the sales dropped a lot.

So much, infact, that they had to halt production of the system at some point.

The price drop to 99$ didn't do miracles either and they gladly ditched the system when Wii came out.

I've also heard that GC's poor sales were backed by the great GBA sales.

My point is that each GameCube console was sold at a profit, whereas each Xbox console was sold at a loss. Despite the GameCube's underwhelming sales, Nintendo weren't suffering any losses from it since they were still profiting from each hardware sold.

On the other hand, Microsoft was selling the Xbox hardware at a loss and trying to profit from the software, so a strong software line-up and third-party support was more of a necessity for the Xbox than it was for the GameCube.

Even excluding the GBA, the GameCube itself was still making more profit for Nintendo than the Xbox was for Microsoft (which was suffering losses from the Xbox the entire generation). Microsoft's losses on the Xbox were almost as high as Sega's losses on the Dreamcast, but the difference is that Microsoft had the assets to back it up.